This comparison uses public regulatory filings and TFS methodology. It evaluates financial condition—not checking rates, account fees, service quality, or which institution is universally “best.”
Bank
Springfield, PA
Health score
68.9
Total assets
$172.6M
Bank
Radnor, PA
Health score
87.1
Total assets
$191.0M
Answer first
The Haverford Trust Company leads on financial health and capitalization and profitability and lending quality and growth. Those category leads describe current regulatory metrics only and do not establish a universal product or service winner.
Capital and asset-quality definitions are directly comparable for this pair.
Category leaders
Financial health
The Haverford Trust Company
Higher TFS health score
Capitalization
The Haverford Trust Company
Higher comparable capital ratio
Profitability
The Haverford Trust Company
Higher return on assets
Lending quality
The Haverford Trust Company
Lower problem-loan measure
Growth
The Haverford Trust Company
Higher year-over-year asset growth
Same-source detail
Winner markers appear only where the metric definitions are comparable and both values are available.
| Metric | Sharon Bank | The Haverford Trust Company |
|---|---|---|
| TFS health score | 68.9/100 | 87.1/100Leads |
| Total assets | $172.6M | $191.0M |
| Total deposits / shares | $146.9M | $128.7M |
| Tier 1 capital ratio | 9.38% | 22.49%Leads |
| Return on assets | 0.65% | 8.63%Leads |
| Return on equity | 6.66% | 39.97% |
Sharon Bank
5 branches
The Haverford Trust Company
1 branches
Both institutions report branches in 1 state: PA.
Sharon Bank
Unavailable
The Haverford Trust Company
Unavailable
Counts use an explicitly reviewed CFPB-company-to-regulatory-ID mapping and the same complete 12-month window. Parent-company attribution can include complaints involving affiliates. Lower complaint volume is context—not proof of better service or less consumer harm.
Sharon Bank
0 in TFS registry
The Haverford Trust Company
0 in TFS registry
Institution-level actions come from TFS's exact regulatory-ID registry and are shown as factual context only. They do not affect category winners or the TFS Financial Health Grade. A zero means no action is currently published in this curated registry—not proof that none exists.
Quarterly history
| Quarter | Sharon Bank score | Sharon Bank ROA | The Haverford Trust Company score | The Haverford Trust Company ROA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-Q3 | — | -0.43% | — | 7.46% |
| 2024-Q4 | — | -0.37% | — | 7.63% |
| 2025-Q1 | — | -0.82% | — | 7.45% |
| 2025-Q2 | — | -0.04% | — | 7.06% |
| 2025-Q3 | — | 0.18% | — | 7.20% |
| 2025-Q4 | — | 0.30% | — | 7.97% |
| 2026-Q1 | 68.2/100 | 0.28% |
Keep watching
Get access to your dashboard watchlist and future financial-grade alerts.
Coverage boundaries
Related comparisons
Financial data comes from FDIC BankFind Suite or NCUA Call Reports as labeled. TFS Health Grades are an editorial assessment, not an official government rating or financial advice. Arbitrary comparison pairs are available dynamically but remain noindex unless curated for data completeness and user value.
| Non-performing loans | 0.16% | 0.00%Leads |
| Net charge-offs | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Efficiency ratio | 85.06% | 80.34%Leads |
| Loan-to-deposit ratio | 92.16% | 100.51% |
| Asset growth (YoY) | 1.40% | 4.36%Leads |
| Deposit / share growth (YoY) | 0.41% | 3.59%Leads |
| Branches | 5 | 1 |
| Published CFPB complaints per $1B deposits (12 months)verified mappings only | — | — |
| 83.2/100 |
| 8.96% |
| 2026-Q2 | 68.9/100 | 0.65% | 87.1/100 | 8.63% |